Britannica AI Icon

Geothermal power

Is geothermal power a good form of energy?

Geothermal power, as Encyclopédia Britannica explains, is a “form of energy conversion in which geothermal energy—namely, steam tapped from underground geothermal reservoirs and geysers—drives turbines to produce electricity. It is considered a form of renewable energy.” The amount of geothermal energy within Earth far exceeds global energy requirements, but harnessing this energy to produce electricity can be difficult. To date, despite its potential, geothermal power makes up less than 1 percent of total U.S. energy use and 1 percent of the world’s electricity generation, which is far less than that produced by most other renewable energy sources. [3] [4] [24]

Use of geothermal energy as a power source is not new. Native Americans used it for cooking some 10,000 years ago, and ancient Greeks and Romans used hot springs to heat their baths. [4]

As Britannica notes,

While humans have long made direct use of geothermal energy as a source of heated water, the first geothermal electric power generation took place in Larderello, Italy, with the development of an experimental plant in 1904. The first commercial use of that technology occurred there in 1913 with the construction of a plant that produced 250 kilowatts (kW). Geothermal power plants were commissioned in New Zealand starting in 1958 and at the Geysers in northern California in 1960. [3]

There are three types of geothermal power plants, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration:

  1. Dry steam plants use steam directly from a geothermal reservoir to turn generator turbines, which produce electricity.
  2. Flash steam plants take high-pressure hot water from deep underground and convert it in a “flash tank,” which has a pressure much lower than exists underground, causing some of the water to be “flashed” into steam, which drives generator turbines, producing electricity. When the steam cools, it condenses to water and is injected back into the ground to be used again. Most geothermal power plants are flash steam plants.
  3. Binary-cycle power plants transfer the heat from geothermal hot water to another liquid. The heat causes the second liquid to turn to steam, and the steam drives a generator turbine, producing electricity. In this type of plant, the geothermal water never touches the turbine and is returned to the ground. This closed system produces no air emissions. [5]

Because geothermal energy is found mostly at the surface of Earth on major tectonic plate boundaries (where hot springs, geysers, and volcanoes are found), geothermal power plants are generally located near these geologic “hot spots.” Here magma, thin crust, and high-heat flow allow for easy access to underground steam or hot water. This hot material is then used to drive turbines, which produce electricity. The cooled water is then typically returned to the ground via a closed-loop system where the water is circulated in sealed pipes, preventing the contamination of groundwater. [6] [7]

In the United States these hot spots are located in Hawaii and six western states—California, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Utah. The amount of geothermal power generated in these areas varies, from 0.1 percent of a state’s total electricity generation (New Mexico) to 10.1 percent (Nevada). [5] [7]

Globally, 28 countries and territories, including the United States, used geothermal energy from power plants in 2024, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency: Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Guadeloupe, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Indonesia, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Portugal, Russia, Taiwan, and Turkey (TĂŒrkiye). In recent years geothermal energy has also been used by Austria. Although geothermal energy typically accounts for a small portion of a country’s energy portfolio, it accounts for 66 percent of Iceland’s electricity. [8] [9]

Quite a few of those countries, including parts of the United States (i.e., Alaska, California, and the Pacific Northwest), sit along the Ring of Fire, which is a roughly 25,000-mile (40,000-km) ring around the Pacific Ocean that contains over 450 volcanoes; it is the most seismically active area in the world. This is a prime area for geothermal power plants, because these active tectonic plate boundaries produce the necessary high-temperature heat, water, and permeable rock required to generate electricity. [10] [11]

However, as Stanford University geophysicist William Ellsworth notes, though these natural, geographical hot spots for capturing geothermal energy are “an important source of clean energy,” they “are rare and pretty much tapped out.” As a result, there is a need to build geothermal plants in non-seismic, nonvolcanic areas of the world for drilling and reaching deeper geothermal resources. In these areas enhanced geothermal systems (EGSs) are built, where high-pressure fluids are injected into deeply set hot rock to create fissures in places that are insufficiently permeable to water flow; this hydraulic fracturing and high-powered water injection mirrors the methods used in fracking for oil and natural gas. But, instead of mixing water, sand, and chemical additives for this fracturing (as done in fracking), an EGS primarily uses just water for fracturing the hot rock, transporting heat to the surface for generating the electricity. In other words, an EGS is a cleaner form of energy capture compared with fracking, one with less risk of contaminating the surrounding area and groundwater with chemical additives. But an EGS does entail other environmental risks, such as inducing earthquakes because of its high-pressure, deep-drilling techniques. [12] [13]

Geothermal energy can also be generated by smaller heat pumps, which can be installed to service one or several buildings, similar to the way that a small set of solar panels can be installed on the roof of a home or building. As of March 2025, about 1.3 million (1 percent) American homes use a geothermal heat pump. One forecast suggests that as many as 28 million geothermal heat pumps could be installed by 2050, whereas the U.S. Department of Energy says the “technical potential” will exist for 80 million geothermal heat pumps in commercial and residential buildings by that time. [14] [15] [16] [17]

The difference between geothermal large-scale power plants and smaller geothermal heat pumps is in how each harnesses and converts geothermal energy into usable power. Whereas large power plants must convert the energy (converting the high-temperature, deep-underground steam/hot water into electricity), smaller heat pumps circulate fluid (water or a mixture of water and antifreeze) through pipes under the house, building, or adjacent lawn, where they absorb the heat from the constant-temperature ground (approximately 50–60 °F, or 10–16 °C); this heat is then heated or cooled to whatever temperature is desired via a typical HVAC thermostat. Geothermal heat pumps are considered efficient, “direct-use” energy generators because they do not have to convert the energy before it can be used. As Dandelion Energy explains,

Geothermal heat pumps circulate fluid through underground pipes, where they absorb heat. This heat is then extracted, compressed, and circulated throughout the home using its existing ductwork, warming it to whatever temperature you’ve set on your thermostat. This means that heat pumps are much more straightforward solutions for residential heating and cooling: power plants must generate electricity first before they can provide electric heat, but heat pumps can immediately begin circulating heat. [14]

Geothermal power is a highly reliable, renewable, sustainable, and low-emission form of energy, but it can also be expensive, geographically restricted, and environmentally risky, leading to the debate about whether geothermal power is a good form of energy to pursue.

Pros and Cons at a Glance

PROSCONS
Pro 1: Geothermal power is flexible and reliable, with low operating costs. Read More.Con 1: Geothermal power plants entail high up-front costs and are geographically limited. Read More.
Pro 2: Geothermal power can be efficiently used on a small scale, such as a single home or building. Read More.Con 2: Geothermal power plant construction can trigger earthquakes. Read More.
Pro 3: Geothermal power is a consistent, clean energy, with a small land footprint, making it less obtrusive to the natural landscape. Read More.Con 3: Geothermal power plants can endanger water supplies and wildlife. Read More.

Pro Arguments

 (Go to Con Arguments)

Pro 1: Geothermal power is flexible and reliable, with low operating costs.

Geothermal energy can be used for cooling, heating, electricity, and even energy storage, and it’s always on, regardless of weather conditions or time of day. It is a perfect energy for filling the gaps caused by more weather-constrained sources such as solar and wind. As such, it can greatly help to prevent electrical grid failures. [20] [25]

The U.S. Department of Energy elaborates on this advantage:

Geothermal power plants have a high-capacity factor—typically 90% or higher—meaning that they can operate at maximum capacity nearly all the time. These factors mean that geothermal can balance intermittent sources of energy like wind and solar [which, unlike geothermal, need to store their energy for their intermittent “down times”], making it a critical part of the national renewable energy mix. [20]

Furthermore, according to a June 2025 financial analysis, geothermal power plants cost less to operate than offshore wind farms, as well as natural gas, nuclear power, and coal plants. Geothermal plants are also cost competitive with solar and onshore wind projects. [21]

So, although geothermal power may not be a practical resource everywhere, it is a useful, long-term, cost-effective energy in many locations and a wonderful addition to a climate-friendly energy portfolio.

Pro 2: Geothermal power can be efficiently used on a small scale, such as a single home or building.

Renewable energies can be used in conjunction with one another to provide specialized power to a single building.

Geothermal heat pumps (GHPs) take natural heat found belowground to warm and cool homes efficiently and do not have the geological restrictions of large geothermal power plants positioned over “hot spots” around the world. According to the Climate Adaptation Platform, 

Widespread adoption of GHPs could significantly reduce peak demand on the national electric grid. A report indicates that if fully implemented, GHPs could lower peak demand by hundreds of gigawatts (GW) during both summer and winter months. [15]

The lower peak demand translates into energy cost savings for consumers, as well as keeping fossil fuel energy production lower during peak hours, which translates into environmental savings. [15]

Much like solar power panels on the roof of a house, geothermal heat pumps can significantly speed up the transition to alternative and renewable energies and away from fossil fuels.

Pro 3: Geothermal power is a consistent, clean energy, with a small land footprint, making it less obtrusive to the natural landscape.

According to Harvey Michaels and Aaron Krol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

Geothermal is one of the few mature energy technologies (along with nuclear and hydroelectricity) that can offer firm [always available] power without producing climate-warming greenhouse gases. [22]

Most geothermal systems emit only water vapor, sometimes with very small amounts of sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides, or particulates, which is much cleaner than fossil fuel power, nuclear power, and most renewable energies. [23]

Moreover, water is the primary fluid injected into the ground during geothermal’s hydraulic fracturing for creating or enhancing the fracture networks in hot rock. It avoids the potentially dangerous chemical additives commonly used in fracking for oil and gas. [13]

Geothermal energy is also sustainable because Earth will continue to radiate heat from its radioactive core for billions of years to come. [23]

Geothermal power plants also have a small land footprint, taking up much less space than other alternative energies such as solar and wind; as a consequence, they are much more aesthetically acceptable and less obtrusive to the natural landscape around them. As Jacob Marsh of EnergySage explains,

A geothermal power plant capable of producing one gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity would take up approximately 404 square miles of land surface, while a wind farm at the same energy output would need about 1,335 square miles, and a solar farm would need about 2,340 square miles. That’s 88 percent less space for a geothermal power plant compared to a solar farm. [19]

Finally, because geothermal is a “firm” power—operating continuously regardless of weather conditions—geothermal energy does not require batteries to store its power the way solar and wind do, eliminating the need for environmentally dangerous lithium mining, as well as lithium battery production and recycling. [25]

Con Arguments

 (Go to Pro Arguments)

Con 1: Geothermal power plants entail high up-front costs and are geographically limited.

Many alternative energies have basic, built-in restrictions and limitations. Solar and wind, for example, are restricted by weather and time of day, but geothermal energy on a large scale is restricted by geography.

As Dandelion Energy explains,

Geothermal power plant locations are restricted by geological features: they must be built at sites of volcanic or seismic activity, such as hot springs, geysers, and volcanoes. [32]

High heat is found relatively close to the surface of Earth in these high-seismic places, making geothermal energy more abundant and easier to capture. But this means that this form of energy is highly geographically restrictive on a large scale. [26]

Building geothermal plants in nonseismic areas is possible but expensive. As the U.S. Department of Energy outlines, these high up-front costs include predrilling geotechnical studies through exploration, confirmation, and development drilling, all of which increases project costs. As Dandelion Energy adds, “Though it’s technically possible to engineer enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) in unsuitable environments, it’s highly impractical to do so.” [14] [32]

These restrictions make large-scale geothermal power great for such places as San Francisco and Iceland but not for most areas of the world. This is why geothermal makes up less than 1 percent of global energy production. [24]

Finally, geothermal energy is further restricted by the natural beauty of its richest sources. Many of the most powerful geothermal areas of the world are also some of the globe’s most phenomenal features. The stunning hot springs and geysers of Yellowstone National Park are prime examples, and few people would argue for the covering of these areas with power plants. [18]

Con 2: Geothermal power plant construction can trigger earthquakes.

Enhanced geothermal systems (EGSs) are used to build geothermal power plants in locations that are not on seismic or volcanic sites. They rely on drilling similar to fracking for natural gas and oil to access these underground resources, and this drilling can be dangerous. [13]

As Stanford geophysicist William Ellsworth explains,

Operators drilling a geothermal well line it with a steel tube using the same process and technology used to construct an oil well. A section of bare rock is left open at the bottom of the well. They pump water into the well at high pressure, forcing open existing fractures or creating new ones. [13]

These procedures carry environmental risks. In particular, an EGS can cause earthquakes (called “induced seismicity”). In November 2017 a magnitude-5.5 earthquake shattered Pohang, South Korea. Dozens were injured and over 1,700 residents were forced into emergency housing. The earthquake was conclusively linked to an EGS project. [13] [28]

Between 2003 and 2009, EGSs also caused smaller earthquakes in Australia (up to magnitude 3.7), France (2.9), Switzerland (3.4), and Germany (2.7). [27]

Con 3: Geothermal power plants can endanger water supplies and wildlife.

As the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service explains,

Most geothermal power plants require a large amount of water for cooling or other purposes. This need could raise conflicts with other users or uses such as fish spawning and rearing in areas where water is in short supply. [28]

Additionally, the department notes,

Steam vented at the surface may contain hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, methane and carbon dioxide. Dissolved solids discharged from geothermal systems include sulfur, chlorides, silica compounds, vanadium, arsenic, mercury, nickel and other toxic heavy metals. All of these releases, if concentrated, can create localized fish and wildlife kills. [28]

In 2023 a geothermal project was stopped in Nevada because it would encroach upon the habitat of the critically endangered Dixie Valley toad. Other projects have or would have endangered the bleached sandhill skipper butterfly, the sage-grouse, and steamboat buckwheat. [29] [30] [31] [33]

Although the hydraulic fracturing and closed-loop system associated with an EGS is cleaner than that associated with fracking for oil and natural gas, it still carries risks. Chemicals such as arsenic and sulfur can leak into groundwater from deep wells, overpumping can cause water scarcity, and improper drilling can harm water quality. [28]

Assessment quiz

Take our assessment quiz to test your knowledge of nuclear power and other alternative energy sources. Good luck!

Discussion questions

  1. Is geothermal power a good source of energy? Why or why not?
  2. Compare geothermal power with wind and nuclear powers. Which do you think is best?
  3. Compare the environmental benefits of geothermal power with its environmental consequences. Which of the two is more significant?
  4. What questions do you have after reading the debate above? Where might you find answers?
  5. What was the most interesting thing you learned from this debate?
  6. Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? How and why?. If your thoughts have not changed, explain how and why you better understand the other side of the debate.
  7. Push for the position and policies you support by writing local officials, U.S. senators and representatives, or other people in a position to make the change you champion.

Sources

  1. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Energy Facts Explained” (July 15, 2024), eia.gov
  2. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Monthly Energy Review” (September 2025), eia.gov
  3. John W. Lund, “Geothermal Power,” britannica.com (accessed January 24, 2026)
  4. John W. Lund, “Geothermal Energy,” britannica.com (accessed January 30, 2026)
  5. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Geothermal Explained: Geothermal Power Plants” (December 21, 2022), eia.gov
  6. Union of Concerned Scientists, “Environmental Impacts of Geothermal Energy” (March 5, 2013), ucs.org
  7. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Geothermal Explained: Where Geothermal Energy Is Found” (February 15, 2022), eia.gov
  8. International Renewable Energy Agency, “Renewable Capacity Statistics 2025” (2025) irena.org
  9. Geothermal Rising “What the Duck? How Geothermal Energy Fixes the Solar Energy Duck Curve” (April 25, 2022), geothermal.org
  10. Ocean Exploration, “What Is the Ring of Fire?” (December 17, 2020), oceanexplorer.noaa.gov
  11. U.S. Geological Survey, “What Is the ‘Ring of Fire’?” (February 10, 2026), usgs.gov
  12. Sandra Tvarian Stevens, “Geothermal Fracking: What Are the Risks and Potential Claims?” (August 31, 2011), lexology.com
  13. Josie Garthwaite and William Ellsworth, “Lessons from Pohang: A Stanford Geophysicist Discusses Geothermal Energy’s Earthquake Problem—and Possible Solutions” (May 23, 2019), news.stanford.edu
  14. Dandelion Energy, “What’s the Difference Between Geothermal Power Plants and Geothermal Heat Pumps?” (November 19, 2019), dandelionenergy.com
  15. Climate Adaptation Platform, “Geothermal Heating and Cooling in 80M US Homes by 2050” (March 27, 2025), climateadaptationplatform.com
  16. U.S. Department of Energy, “Geothermal Basics,” energy.gov (accessed March 3, 2026)
  17. U.S. Department of Energy, “Pathways to Commercial Liftoff: Geothermal Heating and Cooling” (January 2025), igshpa.org
  18. Graham Lumley, “Pros and Cons of Geothermal Energy” (November 2024), bkvenergy.com
  19. Jacob Marsh, “The Top Pros and Cons of Geothermal Energy” (November 10, 2021), energysage.com
  20. U.S. Department of Energy, “Geothermal FAQs,” energy.gov (accessed March 3, 2026)
  21. Lazard, “Lazard LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy” (June 2025), lazard.com
  22. Harvey Michaels and Aaron Krol, “Geothermal Energy” (August 8, 2025), climate.mit.edu
  23. Andrew Turgeon and Elizabeth Morse, “Geothermal Energy” (May 10, 2024), education.nationalgeographic.org
  24. Jason Plautz, “Geothermal Could Meet 15% of Global Power Demand—Report” (December 16, 2024), eenews.net
  25. Stefan Ellerbeck, “Here’s Why Geothermal Systems Could Be Better for Storing Renewable Energy Than Batteries” (November 2, 2022), weforum.org
  26. Freyr Sverrisson, “Geothermal Power and Heat” (2025), ren21.net
  27. Sonal Patel, “Assessing the Earthquake Risk of Enhanced Geothermal Systems” (December 1, 2009), powermag.com
  28. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, “Geothermal Energy,” fws.gov (accessed March 3, 2026)
  29. Jennifer Solis, “Toad’s Endangered Listing Forces Ormat, Interior to Rethink Nevada Geothermal Project” (July 13, 2023), rgj.com
  30. Hanry Carnell, “The Toad and the Geothermal Plant” (January 4, 2024), insideclimatenews.org
  31. Arielle Paul, “Burning Man Becomes Latest Adversary in Geothermal Feud” (May 17, 2023), nytimes.com
  32. Dandelion Energy, “Geothermal Power Plant Frequently Asked Questions” (February 12, 2020), dandelionenergy.com
  33. Center for Biological Diversity, “Endangered Species Protections Sought for Rare Nevada Butterfly” (August 8, 2022), biologicaldiversity.org